Posted
by
Soulskill
on Friday December 21, 2012 @08:46AM
from the there-is-but-one-way dept.

Nerdfest writes "Venturebeat is reporting that a successfully funded Kickstarter project for a portable phone charger that works with both Apple and Android devices has been canceled because Apple wouldn't let the creators license its Lightning connector. Quoting: 'Edison Junior, the technology and design lab behind the POP portable power station, is returning the full $139,170 in funding it received from Kickstarter backers to develop the device. Unfortunately, Apple has refused to give the project permission to license the Lightning charger in a device that includes multiple charging options. ... "We didn’t get a yes or a no up front," Siminoff said. "But as we kept going back and forth it was clear that it was getting harder. Then, when we saw that they weren’t even going to allow a Lightning connector and a 30-pin connector together, we knew it was over." He also said that, while Apple is a private company and can do whatever it wishes, it should watch out. "When you do things that are bad for the customer I think it will be bad for them.”''"Update: 12/21 22:16 GMT by S: Apple has relented. A spokesman for the company told Ars, "Our technical specifications provide clear guidelines for developing accessories and they are available to MFi licensees for free. We support accessories that integrate USB and Lightning connectors, but there were technical issues that prevented accessories from integrating 30-pin and Lightning connectors so our guidelines did not allow this. We have been working to resolve this and have updated our guidelines to allow accessories to integrate both 30-pin and Lightning connectors to support charging."

Ah yes, the kickstarter project that began before the official release of the connector, that also features powered USB ports for charging "other devices with incompatible ports" and yet somehow the inability to roll in the Lightning port to a product that was begun before Apple even acknowledged it exists is "doomed".

I wonder, what's to stop iPhone 5 users from plugging in a Lightning cable into one of the powered USB ports on this device? Nothing? So why the need to cancel it?

Exactly my thoughts. I'm actually wondering if they fscked up somehow and are trying to set Apple up as a scapegoat. What is stopping them from just pressing ahead with every connector except the Lightning port and simply saying "we'd like to have done that, but Apple didn't let us" if they really want to draw attention to Apple's supposed monopolistic behaviour. It would still have been useful to everyone who doesn't have one of Apple's latest devices and if Apple ever changed their minds then a v2.0 ve

This is not necessarily the end of the Edison Junior’s portable power project. Siminoff told me that the team will be re-focusing on a device that supports Android phones and tablets and Apple products as well, if backers wish to use a Lightning-to-USB connector, or an older 30-pin connector. They’ll only build that device, however, if the crowdfunding community wants it.

They want to do that, but they'd be building a different project than what people pledged for. So for obvious reasons they would need to start over.

This is not necessarily the end of the Edison Junior’s portable power project. Siminoff told me that the team will be re-focusing on a device that supports Android phones and tablets and Apple products as well, if backers wish to use a Lightning-to-USB connector, or an older 30-pin connector. They’ll only build that device, however, if the crowdfunding community wants it.

They want to do that, but they'd be building a different project than what people pledged for. So for obvious reasons they would need to start over.

But they already are - the Lightning connector was not official when the project began, so how could they offer it?

If they started the project based on rumours of the new connector, or with a plan to include it *without* discussing terms with Apple first, then that was just silly.

But they already are - the Lightning connector was not official when the project began, so how could they offer it?

Presumably they felt their actual offering was "whatever the contemporary connector Apple uses is", given that a device which can only be connected to obsolete devices is.... obsolete.

If they started the project based on rumours of the new connector, or with a plan to include it *without* discussing terms with Apple first, then that was just silly.

Erm, yes, how silly of them to not anticipate that Apple would require licensing for a goddamn power plug. Since when have you had to sign exclusivity agreements to connect a battery to another battery? Can you name any other manufacturer that uses custom authentication chips to prevent people making charging cables? Maybe at the time the Kickstarter project proposal was made, they figured Apple might actually pull its head out of its arse and use the same connector the rest of the world was already standardizing on. Then when the reality turned out to be far worse than they had imagined they realized they'd effectively take peoples money to build a device that wouldn't charge most of their customers iPhones. I think they did exactly the right thing in the circumstance.

Erm, yes, how silly of them to not anticipate that Apple would require licensing for a goddamn power plug

It's not even that; they clearly tried to work within the licensing restrictions they knew would be in place, but Apple's response was completely unreasonable and it forced them to scrap the inclusion of the connector even though they probably had at least $10-$15 worth of margin built in to each unit to account for that.

If Apple can't be wooed to sell the details of EIGHT FUCKING COPPER TRACES for $10 a unit, then yes, FUCK APPLE.

Erm, yes, how silly of them to not anticipate that Apple would require licensing for a goddamn power plug

It's not even that; they clearly tried to work within the licensing restrictions they knew would be in place, but Apple's response was completely unreasonable and it forced them to scrap the inclusion of the connector even though they probably had at least $10-$15 worth of margin built in to each unit to account for that.

If Apple can't be wooed to sell the details of EIGHT FUCKING COPPER TRACES for $10 a unit, then yes, FUCK APPLE.

It's not just eight fucking copper traces, but a chip that automatically detects orientation of the plug and reroutes signals between said traces so that pin 8 always acts like pin 8, even if you flip the plug and it's actually pin 1.

That always puzzled me as well. Stupid USB. Just have the female connector have 4 pins on both sides, the male connector with 4 pins on only one side. Hey look, it's a self orienting mechanical interconnect! Even cheaper than an 8 pin auto-orienter cable! Ah, but you couldn't prevent folks from duplicating the design so easily. Sometimes, it's like everyone's a moron but me.

The iPhone is priced at what the market will bear, not more, and not less. Prices for premium products have nothing to do with their costs. If it cost Apple more to build the iPhone they'd charge the same for it. If it cost Apple less to build the iPhone they'd charge the same for it.

The only thing that is going to affect the price of the iPhone is the price and popularity of other comparable products in the market.

The only time cost comes into play is if the cost is so high that the product cannot be so

Lightning cables, unlike any other connector I can think of outside of HDMI connectors, have custom chips inside them designed to prevent people making their own cables or accessories. So unfortunately you can't make your own.

Yes, they have custom chips. [Citation needed] that they're "designed to prevent" copying. Near as I can tell, the best guess is those chips are there because the 8+1 copper lines are completely configurable and thus need active logic. Considering there are already unofficial Chinese reverse-engineered cables around, I don't think this is insurmountable technically. It's just that Apple isn't going to put their official stamp on it-- and I'm surprised these people expected them to.

Since when have you had to sign exclusivity agreements to connect a battery to another battery?

Whether you are aware or not, you have to pay a license fee to incorporate USB into any device, too. I'm not defending Apple, nor making any judgment about this project. But, yes, licenses need to be obtained, and it is well known that Apple retains a choke hold on their connectors and licenses them only quite sparingly. Arbitrary? Yes. Capricious? Yes. Ought to be loosened and made less exclusive? Definitely. But it's also well known and should have been anticipated.

They sold it as being compatible with current Apple products, on the understanding that it would be when released. This sort of thing has happened before when Apple decided to add some resistors to the standard USB charger so that 3rd party ones wouldn't work, so naturally they wanted to assure backers that the same thing wouldn't happen again.

Well, it did happen again, but this time Apple put in place some stronger protections. Only official Apple chargers can fast charge Apple devices now.

This is not necessarily the end of the Edison Junior’s portable power project. Siminoff told me that the team will be re-focusing on a device that supports Android phones and tablets and Apple products as well, if backers wish to use a Lightning-to-USB connector, or an older 30-pin connector. They’ll only build that device, however, if the crowdfunding community wants it.

They want to do that, but they'd be building a different project than what people pledged for. So for obvious reasons they would need to start over.

Or team up with someone who does have the license. If there is anyone.

Then again, could they manufacture a connector which coincidentally works?

Ah, such are the things a patent suit lawyer dreams of.

"Well kill them, then eviscerate them, then flay them, then give them a wedgie!"

The fact is that they saw a niche in the charger market that wasn't being fulfilled (a mufti-purpose charger for Apple and Android devices). What they didn't know is that there was a REASON no one else had built said device (because Apple won't license it). I guess it pays to ask around a little before you start asking for funding. Sometimes you think to yourself "Why isn't anyone making this thing?" and find out the hard way that it's not just because they're short-sighted or hadn't thought of it too.

Yes, fearing Apple's destructiveness toward the world makes sense. But what you said directs attention away from the fact that Apple makes money partly by making products people want, and partly by being destructive toward those people.

Apple's current downward slide is good for the world, because it tends to limit Apple's hostility. What will stop Apple from becoming less and less relevant? The one-time opportunities to make a well-designed music player and a more sophisticated cell phone have come and gone.

More detail: It should not be possible to get a patent on a connector!!! All connectors and other standard ways of doing things like file system organizations must be in the public domain. Otherwise there are numerous opportunities for abuse.

Ditto. That is the PR of the patent industry, which lives and breathes by placing impediments to the progress of science and the useful arts, but there isn't the slightest evidence that the social benefits out weigh the social costs, to say nothing of the of the rent seeking, soul sucking patent attorneys who profit from this perverse deprivation of moral and intellectual rights.

There is no shortage of literature in defense of that position. The patent system, as presently constituted, is a first class train wreck. Virtually every informed observer who is not on the payroll of the patent bar, and who lacks a vested interest in some trivial non-invention, understands that fact.

I think they should be able to patent such things, but they should not be able to refuse to license said patent to someone who is using it for interoperability purposes, such as in this case - i.e., some sort of automatic FRAND.

At the time they made the project proposal the Lightning connector did not exist. The whole concept of licensing it therefore also did not exist. So that can't have been the reason nobody was making them.

I think you meant to write "can't". In any case, you're wrong. If, for instance, I'm the manufacturer (or rights-holder) to product X, and you're another manufacturer that wants to buy X and integrate it with their product and resell it, I absolutely can refuse to sell you my product if I don't like you for some reason.

Of course, you could try to go around to all the retail stores in the country and buy up their stock of X, but that would be prett

Maybe you haven't actually look at what the device does. You wouldn't get one with a built in battery for $20. Obviously they were offering something different or people would have just bought a $20 device off of Amazon rather than choosing to fund this project.

Here's one [dx.com] that costs $9.70. The Batteries [dx.com] cost $7.31. For a total price of $17.01. If you want more power (personally, I think the first one has more than enough, it can recharge my phone at least twice over) you can get this one [dx.com] for $10.40 which uses 4 of the same batteries I linked to. Total price with batteries for that unit would be $25.02

The Kickstarted project had a 26000 mAH battery, could output 2.1amps on each of four cables (enough to charge four iPads simultaneously at full speed), and was going to have built in, retractable cables supporting micro USB, 30 pin dock and Lightning connections.

The product you linked to takes two AA batteries. You suggest a battery with a MODEL NUMBER of 18650, but a mAH rating of 2400 mAH, for a total of 4800. 9600 if they bought the four battery model you suggest. It has *ONE* USB port, no built in ca

Actually I think you are still wrong, the device they were promising to build had a 25,000 mAh battery. It could charge your phone ten times on one charge. You CANNOT find one that large for that price on Amazon.

But by no means should you read the article or actually look anything up before you insist that your two cents is right in multiple posts.

They cancelled it because without the lightning connector, although still useful to many people, it would not be the device people pledged money for.

How could they pledge money for a device promising the Lightning connector when the connector had not been officially announced when the project began?

Were they pledging for a rumoured product? I guess they can receive a rumour in the mail after paying up.

While some (many in the tech community) share your complete lack of scruples, apparently Mr. Siminoff does not and did the morally acceptable thing which is to not take someone's money when he cannot deliver what he promised.

Ever tried to charge an iPad 3 with one of those $20 devices? It takes a long time because only official Apple chargers are allowed to provide 2A. A standard USB charger can't even prevent the battery level from falling when the device is in use, let alone boost it.

Not true; every Android phone out there has a USB charger which provides at least 1A, maybe 2A. Yes, the original spec was 500mA, but there's nothing preventing you from making a charger that supplies more. The spec is only important if you're dealing with a USB port on a computer; those generally still are stuck at 500mA (and only if the device requests 500mA from the OS, otherwise it only gets 100mA). With a charger, there is no OS and no USB data communication, so it just supplies 5A at whatever curre

WTF are you talking about? I never said any such thing. The original ~1996 USB spec is clearly outdated and unsuitable in today's world: 500mA is simply not enough, just like 640K is not enough memory. There's nothing wrong with USB phone chargers exceeding this ridiculously small limit. Apple does the same thing. The only thing wrong with Apple is that they added some resistors to their USB chargers/cables so that third-party chargers couldn't be used, a move clearly designed to break compatibility.

For people that don't have, or ever intend to have, a device that uses Apple's Lightning connector? None at all. Believe it or not, there are plenty of people out there who would love to have a charging station like this that don't even own a single Apple product, depsite the obviously Apple inspired design elements.

As for those who have bought Apple's newer devices, or are considering doing so, it was pretty clear almost from the connector's launch that Apple was going to be heavily restricting access

1. Start a new website, competing with Kickstarter2. think up a way to generate some media attention by creating an Apple-related product that's never intended for release.3. Then tell everyone how Apple screwed you over.

Why not just supply multiple USB ports so people can use their own cables? Why not just make an alteration to BYO cables and offer a refund to any who didn’t want it like that?

Exactly my thoughts. I'm actually wondering if they fscked up somehow and are trying to set Apple up as a scapegoat. What is stopping them from just pressing ahead with every connector except the Lightning port and simply saying "we'd like to have done that, but Apple didn't let us" if they really want to draw attention to Apple's supposed monopolistic behaviour. It would still have been useful to everyone who doesn't have one of Apple's latest devices and if Apple ever changed their minds then a v2.0 version of the device, or maybe they could just make the connectors modular like some PSU connectors are and enable a potential compatability upgrade later?

Very odd indeed.

Really? You wonder why they aren't going to go ahead selling their lightning-capable dock when they aren't allowed to, by instead saying "hey it has a USB port on it instead!" Talk about mislabeling, you must be in marketing. That's like selling an extension cord as "iPhone 5 compatible" with a tiny asterisk pointing to the footnote that "your own dc brick and cable are required". If I were in on this kickstarter (I don't own any lightning-equipped Apple shit so...) I would want my money back too. I ha

and yet somehow the inability to roll in the Lightning port to a product that was begun before Apple even acknowledged it exists is "doomed".

Why would they bother developing yet another USB charging hub? The entire point of this project centered around not needing to carry around 27 different dongles to all do effectively the same task at the same Li-ion-friendly voltage. Ironically enogh, we shouldn't even have a need for this [readwrite.com], since Apple promised (and lied to) the EU to switch to a unified charging standard. Did they break the letter of the law? Apparently not. But does their latest proprietary CashGrab-enabled CopperInPlastic(tm) technology serve any purpose (to the end user) at all?

No. No, it does not. So yeah, Fuck Apple.

I wonder, what's to stop iPhone 5 users from plugging in a Lightning cable into one of the powered USB ports on this device? Nothing? So why the need to cancel it?

Just $20. Though I have no doubt, if they could make these things teleport nickels and dimes straight to Cupertino, they would have gone with that approach per-use instead.

Yes, the entire point of the project was to create a device where you didn't need a dongle... in a saturated market that is already flooded with portable charing devices. It also promised to supply a connector that Apple did not even officially acknowledge the existence of until later, without checking what the licensing terms would be (which was impossible because the connector did not exist officially yet).

The lightning connector is better than a "standard" USB connector in many ways. It's easier to plug in because you don't have to worry about which way to plug it in. It carries more power so it will charge faster. It is smaller, so it will fit on smaller devices. Saying that everyone should use the "standard" is basically saying that what we have now is good enough for all time and should never improve. But I don't think we're there yet.

I use ThunderBolt on a daily basis, and have since the first Macbook Pro supported it. Honestly, it kicks ass. Let me know when you've got another interface as fast AND convenient as TB.

Just like Firewire it may never be as mainstream as USB, but, again, just like firewire was much faster than USB2, TB is much faster than USB3 - and there is a market for that. (And if you actually think USB2 was even close to as fast as FW400 or FW800, or that USB3 is as fast as TB, don't both

I'm not seeing how this is Apple's fault...... they gambled that it would be smooth sailing with the as-then-unannounced connector and pushed ahead with product development without having all of their ducks in a row.

That's the kind of statement that might make sense if Apple and its connector was some kind of inherently unpredictable thing, like a hurricane or an earthquake or the results of cutting edge research. But it's not. It's an electronics company. They deliberately chose to make Lightning propriet

Not to mention this thing was already a questionably useful product. I've got a battery with a bit less than half the capacity, it cost less than half as much, and since it's much less wasteful with empty space, easily slips into a bag or pocket. This POP thing is bulky and awkward. I'm just not seeing a market for it.

Ah yes, the kickstarter project that began before the official release of the connector, that also features powered USB ports for charging "other devices with incompatible ports" and yet somehow the inability to roll in the Lightning port to a product that was begun before Apple even acknowledged it exists is "doomed".

I wonder, what's to stop iPhone 5 users from plugging in a Lightning cable into one of the powered USB ports on this device? Nothing? So why the need to cancel it?

Very odd.

$99 for a fucking USB hub? What the fuck is wrong with you? Not even Apple fans would be fooled by that garbage. Without a lightning cable built in to it, there is no point in buying one, period. End of story. If you want to buy a $99 USB hub, I will be happy to sell you one (that i snatch off of Amazon for $9.) Their high capacity battery option isn't bad but those too are very cheap (despite their claims) and I can easily get one for under $50 while they want $150 for the kickstarted version.

This is a clear cut example of Apple deciding to screw over consumers so they can be the only one to pillage their loyal base. Get over it.

I think you just accurately made my point for me.

The price of the device was the whole problem, since you can buy cheaper USB-compatible high-capacity chargers from Amazon for much less.

No one was complaining about the price of it - you brought that up - but the difference between the device with a built in Lighting cord and one without... is simply the USB>Lightning cord that comes with the iPhone.

ie, if it's a bad deal without the port then it was a bad deal to begin with. I think that realisation hit

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there going to be some sort of legislature dictating that cell phone makers use a universal charging standard by this point? Everyone else has managed micro usb, why is it so hard for apple?

The EU had, and still has, a tacit agreement with equipment vendors to this end in-place, but it's not legally binding and there is no penalty for not following it. Apple signed it, along with most other mobile device equipment vendors, then reneged on their promise and released the Lightning connector anyway. Apple does not care about the environment, it does not care about standards, it does not care about FRAND licensing of its patents, and it sure as hell doesn't care about its customers. Apple cares about making as much money for its shareholders as possible. Period.

Apple cares about making as much money for its shareholders as possible. Period.

That is the purpose — the only purpose — of a business.

I seriously never understood this line of reasoning. Because they have a responsibility to their shareholders, corporations are somehow exempt from all moral and ethical responsibility in every other way? That's like saying, "A car's sole purpose is to drive. So it doesn't have to slow down for pedestrians in crosswalks."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there going to be some sort of legislature dictating that cell phone makers use a universal charging standard by this point? Everyone else has managed micro usb, why is it so hard for apple?

Apple signed a 2009 agreement with the EU intended to reduce iWaste by having all phones, and even the majority of portable devices in general, all use the same charging standard, via a microUSB connector.

Apple "satisfied" this pledge by offering a $20 dongle (aka "yet another piece of iWaste you have to carry around and will end up in the landfill when they come out with Lightning v1.1") that converts microUSB to Lightning.

But hey, Apple users have always had more dollars than sense, so whatever. I really shouldn't even care, since I already voted by sending my dollars to Samsung - But still - C'mon Apple, biggest in the world doesn't do it for you? You that hard up for an extra $20 from people who don't want one of your damned docks?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there going to be some sort of legislature dictating that cell phone makers use a universal charging standard by this point? Everyone else has managed micro usb, why is it so hard for apple?

Millions of people lined up and camped out in droves in order to buy a product that proves that they "think different" and that they are not consumer drones like those people with that other brand of product.

Since just about everything uses USB cables these days, anyhow, why is anyone bothering with designing chargers targeted towards a specific device or family of devices? Just put a USB A receptacle on there, and call it done! Let the licensing be taken care of by those who make cables.

Oh, and one thing I'm NOT confused about is Apple's strategy....screw you, Apple. I'm sick of paying for products that you need to have an apple computer to program for... for an OS that only runs on your hardware, despite having the ability to run just about anywhere... for products that don't have user-serviceable batteries...and for your stupid, non-compliant connectors. I bought my last apple product 5 years ago, and I haven't looked back.

Yes! High five, brother. I also gave up on Apple five years ago. It was a sad day because Macs are all I'd ever owned ever since my first LC III in middle school. I'm still coasting on my MacBook Pro, but I gave up on iPods (Android now), gave up on iPads (I have a Transformer), and gave up on desktop Macs (bought a Linux PC).

unlike plain USB the nice thing about it is that you can plug it into your idevice any way. you don't have to line it up correctly like you do with USB. the pins are interchangable so if you need to say charge your iphone at night and its dark and you just want to plug it in the dark, you just plug it in any way the connector is facing. no need to turn it the right way like with the old one or USB

unlike plain USB the nice thing about it is that you can plug it into your idevice any way. you don't have to line it up correctly like you do with USB. the pins are interchangable so if you need to say charge your iphone at night and its dark and you just want to plug it in the dark, you just plug it in any way the connector is facing. no need to turn it the right way like with the old one or USB

I wouldn't give up compatibility with all my existing docks just to be able to do that. If I can't plug it in in the dark, I flip it around and plug it in the second time. No big deal at all. And don't mention an adapter to me because the plug itself is not the only way they broke compatibility. I have a dock that works with anything iPhone 4 or older, but not with anything iPhone 4S or newer. That includes the new iPod models as well.

I fail to see how or why this Kickstarter project could possibly need a license from Apple for any of this to work. They could build it with a bunch of USB slots and toss in a disclaimer: "cables not included." There, problem solved.

Because in the USA, at least, you can't patent an interface. You can patent all sorts of other stuff, but interface patents are one of the few things you can't patent? That's why AMD and Compaq were able to waltz in and kick IBM's and Intel's ass when it came to pin-socket compatible PC's.

There's an authentication chip in the cables. The iPhone will refuse to charge if it can't handshake with the chip in the cable. To make a compatible cable you'd need to duplicate the chip, which is apparently hard.

They took money for a product they didn't know if they could build, then when it turns out they couldn't, instead of slightly modifying the design by including a female USB port, they set customers up with accounts on their Kickstarter competitor to refund them. This looks pretty much like they changed their mind about building it if favour of pivoting their business to go into crowd funding, and decided to use Apple hate to grab users and publicity.

Yeah, in a Utopian World good deeds would be rewarded, bad folks would be remorseful while heartily accepting their punishment, and there would be a benevolent god rewarding life's protagonists with eternal life. As Alan Jackson has been known to croon, "Here In The Real World", the most important predictor of future business success in an utter lack of conscience.

Forget the Maps debacle, in my opinion it's the Lightning connector that will ultimately do more damage.

And it's not the connector's technical design -- I think it works pretty slick and is a definite improvement mechanically over the 30 pin connector and superior to MicroUSB as well.

It's the overall handling of Lightning that I think is an issue. First of all, shouldn't Lightning have been on the iPad 3 first? IMHO, the iPads are slightly less connector-centric and a release on iPad would have given accessory developers enough lead time to get products designed and through Apple's approval process in time for actual accessories and adapters to be available at iPhone 5 launch. As far as I know, there are very few Lightning accessories available right now -- some car chargers (who hasn't switched to a USB connector by now?) and maybe a Bose dock, but not much else.

The other thing is -- why is Apple being so difficult with device approvals? One thing Apple had going for it was a kind of network effect, where one of things that made iPhone/iPad appealing was a broad range of accessories available for it. By making accessory development difficult, they hurt innovation, which means less stuff, and in theory the Lightning connector should make for innovative products because of its digital nature.

IMHO this is really what will hurt Apple, not Maps, which will be good enough for most people as-is (it's always worked well for me), as well as get better over time.

Soon the winner-takes-all market dynamics turns #1 into an 800lb gorilla, which does what gorillas do, until their once-proud fan base begins to feel the grip tighten to eye-popping intensity, whereupon the parade degenerates into a comic spectacle from the Ministry of Silly Walks.

The parade veterans dress in uncool loose shorts forever after, and express a lot less enthusiasm about chanting "We're #1!" but every generation has to learn for itself, so the cycle r

My partner and I came up with a device that allows you to open a garage door with a smartphone. Just a box with a relay and a Bluetooth radio. When I started looking into whether or not we could do this for iPhone I found apples "Made for iPod" program...their hardware licensing scheme.

The first thing they asked for was our attorney's contact information.

A quick search showed me that it was going to cost in the ballpark of $20,000 to deal with Apple's bullshit. So that didn't happen.

I had presumed that Apple wanted to have tight control over the lightening connector - that is to say, they wanted to maximize their profit - but geesh!

Way to act like Veruca Salt!

In what way? Their terms for licensing the "lightening [sic] connector" are well known, and this project started before the iPhone 5 was even released. Somehow it has become a deal breaker for the project, despite the connector not being officially announced when the project began.

Now the project owner has thrown his toys out of the pram because apparently the built in USB ports on the device will simply make it totally useless and non-viable because Apple denied them a licence for a connector that didn't e

The project also didn't know apple would be make a NEW connector for the iPhone5, so their original plan was "make an adapter that works with all current-gen devices". When Apple changed the connector, that new connector became a requirement to meet that goal, which they were unable to do.

I had presumed that Apple wanted to have tight control over the lightening connector - that is to say, they wanted to maximize their profit - but geesh!

Way to act like Veruca Salt!

In what way? Their terms for licensing the "lightening [sic] connector" are well known, and this project started before the iPhone 5 was even released. Somehow it has become a deal breaker for the project, despite the connector not being officially announced when the project began.

Now the project owner has thrown his toys out of the pram because apparently the built in USB ports on the device will simply make it totally useless and non-viable because Apple denied them a licence for a connector that didn't exist at the start of the project.

How biased do have to be to post this? You keep saying over and over again that the connector was not announced when the project was announced. So what? The connector exists today. Apple denied them a license because they do want their connector to coexist with another connector because in their special universe, only apple products exist.

This level of arrogance is staggering. On top of it, you are not only supporting their arrogance but also trashing a bunch of guys that just wanted to make a simple combo connector. Dude that is pathetic. Apple is a company that makes some great products but are also filled with hubris, and I don't know why you can't let these two thoughts coexist in your head.

I had presumed that Apple wanted to have tight control over the lightening connector - that is to say, they wanted to maximize their profit - but geesh!

Way to act like Veruca Salt!

In what way? Their terms for licensing the "lightening [sic] connector" are well known, and this project started before the iPhone 5 was even released. Somehow it has become a deal breaker for the project, despite the connector not being officially announced when the project began.

Now the project owner has thrown his toys out of the pram because apparently the built in USB ports on the device will simply make it totally useless and non-viable because Apple denied them a licence for a connector that didn't exist at the start of the project.

How biased do have to be to post this? You keep saying over and over again that the connector was not announced when the project was announced. So what? The connector exists today. Apple denied them a license because they do want their connector to coexist with another connector because in their special universe, only apple products exist.

This level of arrogance is staggering. On top of it, you are not only supporting their arrogance but also trashing a bunch of guys that just wanted to make a simple combo connector. Dude that is pathetic. Apple is a company that makes some great products but are also filled with hubris, and I don't know why you can't let these two thoughts coexist in your head.

Right! you're getting it!

* The connector did not exist. The project began, promising support for this non-existent connector, such that denial of use of this non-existent connector is crucial for the product to succeed.

* The connector was announced.

* The project promised to add it.

* Finally, deep in development they discuss licencing with Apple, despite already promising they will include the connector.

Now the project owner has thrown his toys out of the pram because apparently the built in USB ports on the device will simply make it totally useless and non-viable because Apple denied them a licence for a connector that didn't exist at the start of the project.

Read the actual kickstarter page referenced in the summary. He promised it would work with the iphone 5 - it was a reasonable assumption given Apple's terms for licensing the connector for the iphone 4. When he found out he could not live up to his promise - i.e. he could not fulfill his kickstarter contract he had no choice but to cancel the project and start over.

Your characterization of his decision to not unilaterally change the terms of the kickstarter contract, something that might well get him sued by the people who gave him money under the original terms, as throwing "toys out of the pram" is ridiculous. It was the only responsible choice he had.

It has USB ports on it, so it would still work with the iPhone 5.

His choices were a) to ship it as it was originally designed (ie, with no Lightning connector because it didn't exist at the time) and provide the promised iPhone 5 compatibility via the USB ports that were always there, or b) cancel the project and go on record calling Apple "assholes", or c) cancel the project and go back for redesign and don't burn bridges with the technology giant that you want to licence a connector from.

That was then. This is now. Apple is already in decline. People are annoyed at the things Apple will not allow. The iPhone 5 is not quite the wait-in-line-for-weeks thing that its predecessors were. The public knows all too well why Apple took away Google maps and that Apple was proven inadequate when it came to selecting a replacement. And the public was very quick to get their old maps back and recognize this as Apple's defeat and humiliation in this. (I know, it sounds a bit too dramatic, but ask

People have been annoyed at the things Apple will not allow for years. This is nothing new.

The iPhone 5 is not quite the wait-in-line-for-weeks thing that its predecessors were.

Apple just had a record-breaking launch of the iPhone 5 in China last weekend. When the iPhone 5 was first launched, it sold 5 million in its first weekend. The iPhone 4S sold 4 million in its first weekend. The iPhone 4 sold 1.7 million in its first weekend.

The public knows all too well why Apple took away Google maps

Because their license was ending and Google's terms weren't acceptable to Apple?

MBAs now run Apple. They prefer to make "safe choices" unlike Steve Jobs.

Tim Cook runs Apple. He's actually been running Apple for a long time, long before Steve Jobs died. He's just implemented a major restructuring of Apple's divisions. And you've just got done complaining about the risk Apple took with Maps.